9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Three applications under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 439, Criminal P. C. regarding searches conducted in the premises of the petitioners, refusal of certified copies of certain documents by the Magistrate, legality of the searches, and the right of the petitioners to obtain copies of documents. Analysis: The judgment involves three applications under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 439, Criminal P. C. arising from searches conducted in the petitioners' premises by an Inspector from the Special Police Establishment. While no incriminating evidence was found in one case, documents were seized in another. The petitioners sought certified copies of the documents including the report, search warrant, and order-sheet, which were refused by the Magistrate. The main issues raised were the right of the petitioners to obtain copies of the documents and the legality of the searches. The petitioners relied on Section 548, Criminal P. C. entitling them to copies of certain documents, while the opposing argument questioned this entitlement. The argument centered around whether the petitioners were entitled to copies of the police report or application on which the search warrant was issued. The Advocate-General contended that the petitioners were not entitled to copies of the police reports based on precedents. However, a rule from the General Rules and Circular Orders of the Court suggested otherwise. The Court expressed reluctance to grant an absolute right without considering the potential impact on ongoing investigations. Nevertheless, the Advocate-General provided a copy of the order of the Magistrate for the search warrant, indicating a willingness to facilitate a fair assessment of the search's legality. The Court emphasized the importance of a recorded order by the Magistrate before issuing a search warrant, stating that it would typically entitle the affected person to a copy. The discussion also touched upon the distinction between an application and a police report as the basis for the search warrant. In this case, since the order was based on an application rather than a police report, the Court saw no legal objection to granting a copy of the application. Consequently, the Court directed the provision of certified copies of the Magistrate's order and the application made by the Police Inspector for the search warrants. The judgment concluded by allowing both sides an opportunity for further arguments on the legality of the searches in light of the documents for which certified copies were directed to be granted. The petitions were scheduled for a rehearing, and the petitioners were permitted to obtain certified copies of the documents before the next hearing date. The second Judge concurred with the decision, and the case was set for a subsequent hearing to consider additional arguments.
|
